Whoa! Slow down.
While we are talking about welfare abuses and people cheating to get them, realize that the vast majority of welfare spending is on the elderly and those physically unfit to work or are working families. Last time I looked it was up in the 80 to 90 percent of funds spent on government assistance.

Huh. See, here's where I'm naive. Generally, I would think that it's in the best interests of the child to have the biological father listed on the birth certificate, and then have the court orders for A) voluntary termination of parental rights, and B) adoption by stepfather.

In your particular case, maybe it's a non-issue.

When a child is adopted the biological parent(s) are removed from the birth certificate and the adopted parent(s) name is replaced. We adopted our son through foster care in Texas. His original Missouri birth certificate was changed to show my wife and I as the biological birth parents. We were even allowed to get him a new ss# to keep his bio parents from using his credit or claiming him for taxes. This seems to be the norm for adopted children. The ss# was an exception. We had to fight hard for that.

The definition of physically unfit to work is pretty twisted. Big fat people with diabetes don't need disability they need a diet and exercise.

I hope they annotate that you are an adopting parent. I understand deleting the biological parent but for future health reasons I don't understand calling an adoptive parent a biological parent.

That is the way the system works. It is up to the adoptive parents to keep records for all biological family members for future health reasons. The courts do very extensive research to find all biological relatives prior to allowing a child to be adopted by someone that is not in their family tree. We have the most complete list available of any and all family members for our son. On thing you have to understand is most adopted children come from broken homes. These children had very little family support, so there may be little to no history available to them in the future even if they were to stay with biological parents. As mentioned above. The fathers are usually kept off the birth certificates for monetary gain leaving the family tree one sided to begin with. That was not the case with our son, but is commonplace in the foster care system. I'm not saying I agree with the way the system is setup, but I think it is designed for the best interest of the child.

Hey Zeke, wrap, your head around this...
Back in 1986 I took a law class at UTD and paternity and parental rights as well as responsibilities was a big part of it. At the time medical science was just on the verge of what today we think of as pretty commonplace. In what we all thought was a pretty convoluted idea at the time we came up with a list of types of parents:
Egg donor Mother
Sperm donor Father
Womb carrying Mother
Mother that raises the child
Father that raises the child

Our imaginations didn't even think of same sex parents at the time.

I am reminded of that conversation a lot now a days because at the time we considered all our ideas as strictly hypothetical.

By the way, the whole idea of having baby that you have no intention paying for is about as offensive a thing as I have every heard, almost as offensive as a certain party encouraging it for votes. Like a giant field of cattle or something.

I totally agree with you. We had so many children in and out of our home while we were foster parents. It is the saddest thing in the world to hear a child utter the words "Nobody wants/loves me!" My heart would break for these children daily.

Not worried about my birth certificate
I wanna know how you get all those other unearned government give aways.

The section 8 housing and the earned income tax credit.


On second thought never mind. The housing is most likely where I would not want to live and I don't pay taxes anyway.

I don�t recall having a choice in the matter

Oh when I get some time this evening I will give you a. True story no one ever seen coming

Ok Zeek here�s a good one for you.

My uncle was married. His wife was pregnant they goto hospital As she�s getting ready for delivery. They go in the room he comes completely in shock. The new baby girl is black! ( no this isn�t a joke ) he doesn�t agree to his name being on the birth certificate as him and his wife are white. Everyone in the room clearly knows this is not his kid. BUT cause he is married to this piece of work, his name has to go on birth certificate. He then files for divorce and files for a paternity test. During this process he dies. ( I�m sure the embarrassment pain he suffered was very traumatic. His heart gave out!) so now he has a kid not his but in his name. Biological father denies it�s his kid. Mother moves to Florida with kid gets married but is receiving social security from my uncles name seeing it was his child legally. Well the biological father figures this out. He the. Files a parental kinapping against the mother , Florida goes to her house takes kid sends it back to mcihingan to live with the biological father , who now collects the disability money from my uncle seeing it was his kid leagally still. Florida doesn�t arrest her but she has to go back to Michigan to get custody back, she provides the birth certificate that has my uncles name on it and says no it�s not this guys kid. Even though everyone knew it was, he was black and my uncle was white. .baby real daddy is getting 1800$ a month for a kid he said wasn�t his. They get to court and the biological dad is trying to get custody mother shows where he denied baby was his , he refused to dna and mom didn�t want him to cause she got more from social security then she would get from child support and the biological only wanted the kid if he could get the social security money. Case was dropped.

I hired a attorney and tried to get the kid out of my uncles name but was allowed to cause only a sibiling or parent could do that. Shame on the system !!!!!

Really? That surprises me. Can you post sources for that? Not trying to call you out on it because I genuinely don't know, but I find it surprising.

Either way, my argument is that welfare belongs in the realm of charities and not the federal government.

Many of the SNAP benefits go to the working poor. Military families spent about $67 million in food stamps at commissaries in 2016. So while people can game the system, one doesn't want to throw the baby out with the bath water.